Carborendum

Members
  • Posts

    4498
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    200

Everything posted by Carborendum

  1. I was hoping you'd know since you said you just qualify as a boomer. You'd be old enough to know. This guy would be in his late 50s today.
  2. Ppffbbt. Freaking Brit. I knew a Brit who was a convert to the LDS faith. He said that he had to "give up faggots" before he was baptized. At the time, he was unaware of the slang usage. He described it as a type of chocolate rich dessert that happened to be made with coffee (and alcohol?). And they were so delicious he wanted one nearly every week. I've never since been able to find anyone who knew what that was (including other Brits).
  3. In their defense (if there is any justification to do so) the tendency is for people to believe the first thing they are told. Then to change that perspective then takes more energy and proof than it took to originally tell a story (any story) regardless of veracity. This is a very dangerous tendency as a news source because the problem is then multiplied millions of times over.
  4. Be careful what you wish for. You may not realize the reasons behind the stats.
  5. The people were only using Samuel's sons' behavior as an excuse. Yes, the sons were guilty. Yes, it was bad. But the solution was not to replace a prophet with a monarch. It was to appeal to Samuel and to the Lord to change what the sons were doing. Instead, God said, "They haven't rejected you. They've rejected me." Despite the fact that the people had a genuine grievance, that wasn't the real problem in their minds. They wanted a king so they could "be like other nations." They had already wanted to reject God. But they couldn't allow themselves to admit that. They finally found a bona fide complaint and then used that as an excuse to reject "the system" that God had established. But oh-no... they totally weren't rejecting God. They certainly wouldn't want to do that.
  6. Here is the most amazing part of the quote.
  7. I was going to post a long post that built upon JAG's post. But after I was all done, I realized that all I had done was I had repeated JAG in an entirely verbose manner.
  8. I'm guessing you haven't hear Leonard Cohen's original lyrics. Most people have heard Pentatonix version which is toned down -- but still not appropriate for Church. But the question is not about "family friendly" content (although that certainly ought to be considered). It is about whether certain words, phrases, and depictions are appropriate for a musical number in Sacrament meeting. As an instrumental, perhaps it isn't exactly inappropriate. But I don't know what it ads to a Sacrament experience. I once was in a student ward and was waiting for people to show up for church. This was at BYU, so our "chapel" was a classroom that had a piano. As I was waiting alone, I began playing John Lennon's Imagine. No lyrics. Just the piano. It's a pretty tune. I was pretty a-political at that point in my life. But a particular conservative student (what? at BYU? No way!) asked if I could play a different song. He was very polite. But he really didn't appreciate me playing it (because of the communist themes in the song). It may be only instrumental. But we all know what the "official" lyrics to the song are. And playing the tune can't help but bring up the lyrics to most people's minds.
  9. So, Biden just appointed a former PLO spokeswoman as the person in charge of determining eligibility for asylum from Palestine. Yeah, that will work out well. AND... Hamas blew up their own hospital and blamed it on Israel. Yup, they're oppressed.
  10. Where did you get this information? They allow foreigners to "be a member" of any religion. But one cannot show any "public observance" of any religion other than Islam. They allow work-arounds (with severe restrictions) for many religions. But officially, none are "legal" except for Islam.
  11. The point I was making was last sentence of my previous post. They lure you in with one question, then they draw a pre-designed conclusion. And they NEVER ASK the respondents the important question about "how do you know?" They simply pose that question when criticizing the responses. They don't dare actually allow a response to the question. That would destroy the narrative. NOTE: I'm not accusing Connie of such subterfuge. But surveys like this are used specifically to make such points and paint respondents in a bad light.
  12. There are many Christian churches that are legal in Saudi Arabia because of their state run oil company Saudi-Aramco. But they are extremely limited in where they can go. And they certainly cannot proselyte. They have to hire western engineers and project managers to do their design work. And they prefer to have all personnel in-house, not outside contractors. There simply isn't enough of the native population that is qualified. The westerners are kept in gigantic compounds that are cared for by the company. Get this: Grass lawns. Yes. Most of the rest of the nation is a desert. But these compounds have grass lawns. Food is delivered to their homes on a regular basis. So, they don't have to go shopping. They just fill out a grocery list and it gets filled. And they have maid service. They are allowed outside the compound and usually have escorts, especially the women. Schools are available for children. The parents say that it is like living in the 1950s. Crime, drugs, etc is non-existent. Being so isolated, almost no one gets sick. While technically other religions are illegal, the Crown allows special dispensation for these employees. AFAIK, we have a population of Saints about the size of a very large stake. But we can't call it a stake even though it is one. The employees are given a well-kept non-descript building to "do whatever" -- meaning that they can perform their religious observances as they wish. But it has to be kept within the compound. I haven't heard about any other populations other than Christian ones there. Not to say they aren't there. I just haven't heard one way or the other.
  13. This is a double-edged sword. The likely takeaway from such would be,"If you've never experienced it yourself, how can you know if it happens?" With so many people who simply self-censor, realizing they would be cancelled if they didn't do so, we're left with acknowledging the famous people who were cancelled. But the survey doesn't ask about that.
  14. This was not in our church. It was in a friend's church.
  15. There is a reason it was called a wedding garment. I'd call attention to the part about the interloper not even offering an answer. In parables where someone doesn't do what is the "obvious" thing, but instead does nothing, it is often because the metaphor involved indicates that the person cannot to that thing. The obvious response would have been to lie and make up an excuse. But he didn't even do that. He simply didn't answer. It is because he couldn't answer. So, The King asks one of the wedding guests a question. That guest cannot answer. He can't answer because he has never received an answer -- his answer.
  16. As JAG said, they were different audiences. There is some information/references in Matthew's version (to the Jews) which gentiles would not understand.
  17. There is always a balancing of our own work vs Christ's power to change us. It is always both.
  18. I've heard of people singing Hallelujah (by Leonard Cohen) in church simply because it used the word hallelujah and had some biblical references. Apparently, people don't actually listen to lyrics.
  19. That's what it's used for today. But they didn't use it in steel back then (that we know of). And the utility is not great enough for it to be considered a precious metal. Only a small amount of manganese is used in steel alloys today. It just wouldn't be considered a semi-precious metal.
  20. I agree it is highly unlikely that they developed the Bayer process. In fact, it was pretty obvious. The Bayer process turned it into a more common metal. From the description in the BoM, it seemed to be a semi-precious metal. If they had some other process that simply made it easier than the torturous process that was initially invented, it would have changed it from a precious to a semi-precious metal. I'm not so sure manganese (or many of the transition metals) would have had any useful purpose in large quantities. For a metal to be precious or semi-precious, it has to have some trait that makes it so. Gold is a noble metal. It is highly malleable and ductile. Aluminum has great utility. Manganese? What is it used for that would put it in demand or make it a semi-precious metal? I'm not seeing it. Other transition metals also exhibit low utility or special qualities. I tend to discount many of the other metals because of combinations of abundance (overall quantity found in the earth), utility, availability (where is it found) density, & melting point.